Interview contamination is an occurrence that happens when investigators negatively impact the process of interviewing. The resultant outcome is that the interviewee ends up providing inaccurate information. Contamination may from time to time interfere with the subject’s ability to assist in the investigation at hand effectively. Memory contamination often impedes the process of truth investigation and might end up compromising the case being investigated. From the innumerable studies conducted by memory experts such as Elizabeth Loftus, astounding results have been arrived at regarding the capacity of false memory implantation in a person’s mind.
Age, occupation, gender and educational status posit the least hindrance on memory implantation as the studies pointed out. Looking at one of her most notable studies on the topic of memory, How reliable is your memory?, Loftus goes on to prove that subjects are often likely to believe in a false memory 25% of the time it is done (“How reliable is your memory?,” n.d). While conducting her studies, Loftus combined real and false childhood memories to the subjects of her study. There are many ways that can be used to contaminate memories such as suggestion, where information is provided, and a suspect ends up implanting it in their minds. Understanding the memory implantation process allows a person to comprehend better ways of dealing with memory implantation.
However, years of studies and research have been instrumental in developing ways and practices that can be employed to minimize memory contamination. The first and most crucial way that can be employed is avoiding leading questions or statements. Leading questions provide a loophole through which an answer gets implanted in the mind of a subject or suspect. By mixing real and false memories, a blurred image is created in the mind of a suspect. Open-ended questions are instrumental in ensuring that contamination is avoided. The open-ended questions create the perfect condition where an investigator cannot impose his views and opinions on a suspect. Investigations and interviews may create a degree of duress in a suspect or subject; however, when open-ended questions are used, a witness, suspect or victim is provided with a degree of freedom to express their views.
The second most important practice that is used to ensure interview contamination is avoiding is witness coaching-an aspect that is referred to as investigator bias. Despite the desire to eliminate investigator bias and interview contamination, overdoing it might still compromise the process. Tailoring questions for the witness, or victim is not necessarily important. They should be accorded the opportunity to represent and give their information in a way that is not limiting. The correct and right information is likely to be collected if a victim or witness is granted autonomy and a chance to provide what they have without interference (Kapardis, 2010).
In the line of crime and investigation, an investigator is tasked with the duty of finding the truth and ensuring that criminals are put behind bars and justice is attained. For this to be attained, the right processes and procedures have to be followed. Interviewing techniques are the primary basis upon which information is gathered, and the reason it should be given preeminence and attention. All components of an interview are essential no matter how minute or irrelevant they may seem. The gathering of information is the primary role of an investigator; it is used to collect the truth, a process that is daunting and precarious and which can compromise a case. By observing the right practices, as mentioned above, an investigator can avoid the interview contamination.
References
How reliable is your memory? (n.d.). Retrieved July 26, 2016, from https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory?language=en
Kapardis, A. (2010). Psychology and law: A critical introduction. Cambridge University Press.
